HISTORY AS A BRANCH J)F LITERATURE of Kings and Courtiers were well exchanged against the tenth part of one good History of Booksellers. Imperfectly as they might have executed it, such writers had the vision of a broader kind of history than was envisaged by the descendants of the chroniclers and J:he old narrators. They saw need, at any given moment in the story, of holding in the imagination some picture or impression of the broad sweep of life in the world; and, if only because they began by being so pictorial in their historical reconstruction, they discerned first the interest and then the importance of economic and social changes. It would seem that their vision of social history was a thing which it was difficult for them to put into execu- tion ; and too" often they were content with a purely static picture—they would stop the cinematograph film of history at a certain point (as Macaulay did in 1685) and produce a painting of still life, a portrait of the world as it happened to stand at a particular* time. Even Professor Trevelyan's Social History of England, which is genealogically descended from this practice, suffers from being so largely a mere succession of just these pictures of still life—not a cinematograph film but a series of lantern slides. And thp notion of a history of the English people hardly had justice done to it in the Short History of John Richard Green. Perhaps only very recently have we come to conceive of a social history of a country which shall not be merely amorphous, like the panoramic descriptions of the older historians, and not a mere succession of " stills ", but the story of a developing structure. And perhaps only a high degree of literary art can solve the problem of portraying a H.H.R.